Wednesday, December 28, 2011

I submitted one of the new chapters in 2020/TACM to newswithviews. The book revisions are underway and it won't be much longer before everyone who pre ordered will have their copies. I know some people are very upset with us because of the long delays and I don't blame them one bit. It has been over a year since some people ordered theirs.

There are several reasons it's so overdue, all of them are of a personal nature and partly health related, so I am extremely grateful to the majority of our customers who have shown us such patience. I am humbled by the people who became so concerned that we were unable to fulfil our obligations that they wrote not to ask for a refund but to ask where to send donations and how else they can help us to finish it. Some people know (from following my blog) how little we have and how we live. There have always been people who respected the way we didn't try to make money off our research, they appreciated the fact that we had no advertisements and flashing banners saying "Buy now!" I always wanted to maintain that kind of presentation, in spite of the reality that sites without ads usually have funding coming from someplace else.

For years I avoided the whole marketing scene because I really believed that this was such essential information that it had to be free. I managed to survive on part time jobs for many years so that I could keep studying and writing continuously. And then my body just gave out after years of sporadic eating, the stress of the topic and constant studying in primitive conditions. I started this work when I was 43 and still felt young enough to go winter camping to research and write ACL articles in a tent. I'm 55 now, and sleeping in a tent on the ground in the rain about killed me this past summer. Anyone who's ever had pneumonia will understand why I almost wished I would die. But somehow a brush with death also brings on a new sense of purpose and determination. Now I feel inspired to put these books out for sale and put the free research back online in the new format. One last time I'll forget about eating and spend the winter writing in a wood heated unplumbed Gertee. But this has to be the last time I do this.

Monday, November 21, 2011

Last night I looked at how compelling the forces working within the dialectical games are. I see steady pushing in the right v left arena. I see the conflict written out in plain English everywhere I go. And, what's really interesting is to see how the synthesis is being more often lumped back in with the sides against capitalism. It's apparent to me now that no matter how much right or left patriot Americans learn about the communitarian synthesis, they usually revert right back to the communist versus capitalist arguments, which do nothing but help push the solution!

In my humble opinion, we would all be much better off in opposing the horrible solution, the political, social and legal framework for regional and international Communitarian Integration. The new planning law, this new spiritual law that in some nations is now part of their revised constitutions, is not called communism or capitalism. If it's called socialism at all, it's called Communitarian Socialism, or in less official documents, Market Socialism.

Americans could so easily find the premise for many new laws in the United States if they stopped using the outdated words communism and socialism AND capitalism. We'd be much better off focusing serious attention on the growing body of regulations that balance individual liberty against the common good. Our people should be looking for the words Communitarian or Community when studying recent, drastic regulatory changes to local, state and national standards and norms. Citizens could find their newly formed agencies enforcing the new communitarian laws, if only they knew the legal term Community is different from the word.

Communitarian Law and Community Law are exactly the same terms and are used interchangeably in the international legal arena. All UN, EU and WTO and Regional Unions are based in the Supremacy of Communitarian Law clause. The real and verifiable name of the emerging global governance bureaucracy is called Communitarianism. The documentation to support this is all over the world now, and new publications such as this one appear online daily:

The European cooperation for development policies: between national interests and communitarian norms

Drd. Victor NEGRESCU1 is currently a PhD candidate at the National School of Political Science and Administration (SNSPA), with an MA in International and European Studies at IEP Grenoble and Pierre Mendes France University, and a member of the teaching staff of the Faculty of Political Science of the Dimitrie Cantemir Christian University. He is a member of FOND – National Federation of the NGOs for Development in Romania and member of several research working groups on development policies.

Abstract: In the context of the growing importance of the cooperation for development in the European Union and the appearance of a common growing public opinion agreement supporting this kind of initiatives, it is necessary to understand if we can talk today about a true common European policy. Still covered on intergovernmental level and considered to be a part of the national foreign policies, EU development aid is still far from reaching the maximum of its efficiency.

In this paper we try to introduce a new evaluation method of the cooperation for development policies and interpretation of the degree of communitarisation of the national policies that will enable us to appreciate the stages that have to be completed by the member countries but also by the EU to realize a completely uniform European assistance strategy and of the activities, so necessary for raising the efficiency of the funds allocated by the EU, but also in the perspective of achieving the Millennium Development Goals

There are stages that have to be achieved before the next level of social evolution can be reached. Everyone who studies Marxism learns the basic formula for helping reluctant, unenlightened people to change like butterflies into the next stage.

The revolutionary process called dialectical materialism is the core foundation for Marxist thinking. Marx modified the Hegelian theory of dialectical idealism. Unlike Hegel's theory of ideals driving history, dialectical materialism is the idea that material conditions drive ideals, and more importantly, can influence human history. Marx proposed mankind embarks on an evolutionary series of MATERIAL conflicts between the classes, and the bloodier the battles, the better. Hegel provided the Big Idea that mankind achieves perfection when the state becomes God, and that the highest form of freedom is only achieved through complete submission to the state as God. Marx and Engels took the conflict further and made it a physical struggle as well.

Dialectical Idealism and Dialectical Materialism are the two main forces driving every 20th century and onward revolution on the planet. The part most conservatives refuse to accept as a possibility, is that without their support for the opposite theory of capitalism, communism could not exist as the force that it became. These theories of economic systems were designed to feed off each other's never ending natural breeding grounds for animosity, and it has the most potential to turn vague senses of wrongdoing into seething anger into violence. Both Hegel and Marx agreed violence is the best scenario for moving humanity toward its destiny.

Capitalism versus Communism is designed to be most effective when there are only two classes left, the poor and the rich. Naturally the American middle class has much to lose in this "final" battle between the top and bottom class. Recent history of Marxist inspired revolutionaries extends beyond Pol Pot, Stalin and Hitler, it includes capitalist funded imperialist puppets, like the Somoza family in pre-Sandinista Nicaragua. Neither "side" of the Capitalist versus Communist debate can claim perfection over the other. Both economic theories have contributed their share to global poverty and deaths in the millions. The Capitalist versus Communist conflicts are also a bit inconsistent. The United States sided with Stalin and still sides with Israel, a nation founded on an kabbalistic communitarian system called the kibbutz.

Our thesis is global communitarianism is the final stage that balances all of the conflicts. We pose that this is the final, unnamed system planned to unnaturally occur at the end of the dialectical conflicts of opposites game. Some schools still teach that both Marx and Engels were vague about what that final perfect middle between all opposite ideologies would be called, but in the U.S. patriot news communism is usually taught as the ultimate goal of Marxist revolutions.

If you follow the line of Marxist logic, communism cannot be the final synthesis of Ideas. The final perfect solution has to be a combination of the conflict between two previously posed ideas. It cannot be one or the other, because the final solution is totally Balanced and new. Even the Dictatorship of the Proletariat was only a phase toward ultimate harmonization of all people under one set of values and norms which requires no enforcement. Since there is a direct, ongoing dialectical conflict between capitalism and communism/socialism, then none of those ideologies can be the synthesis. Any one of the familiar theories that has existing opposition cannot be the final, perfect solution, according to the forumla for human social evolution.

Each new synthesis has to be identified as something that merged the thesis and the antithesis into a new Idea. Political synthesis can only be something that brings people from both sides to a middle compromise. Up until Communitarianism was introduced, the middle compromise has continued to become a new thesis with an established opposition camp. According to the theorists, the way we would know when we had reached the final stage of human social evolution was when there arose no opposition to the synthesis. Perfection is reached when nobody alive claims the most recent synthesis is imperfect. Communitarianism is the most recent synthesis, and so far, the only organized opposition is us. We are nobody lowborn commoners without titles of nobility or degrees. That basically means there's no opposition.

Evidence for Communitarianism being the final Marxist/Capitalist solution between the two supposedly opposing "sides" exists in abundance. Our argument has, so far, proved incontrovertible. Our argument, our reasoning, and our version of the evolutionary history of Communitarianism have never once been disputed, nor have any of the documents we cite been proven to be fraudulent. We have, since 2003, openly solicited responses from Dr. Amitai Etzioni and his Network. We have also had our thesis introduced in graduate level classes where we offered to print anything the students wanted to write about it. We have never received any papers disputing us. Our ACL research website has had over a million visits, and over half of them have been to our thesis. If our poll and stats data can be trusted, we've had more than one school review board visit our Hegel page. I still feel this should qualify us for a nice fat grant and admission to a formal anticommunitarian studies program, but that offer is still forthcoming. :)

Back to the argument:

2. Communitarianism, a recent modification of the U.S. legal system, did not arise naturally from the people of the United States, it was never approved or adopted by the U.S. House (of directly elected) Representatives, or any directly elected state legislatures.

3. Anything that changes or modifies the constitutions of any states or the federal constitution, without full disclosure and full consent of the people who legally govern in this nation, is sedition against the authority of the legitimate rulers here, who are the American people. Sedition and treason are criminal offenses under US Code.

International environmental and trade associations, councils, and courts, established under WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA, UN Local Agenda 21, and the Earth Charter, have never been officially explained to Amercians, nor have the provisions inserted into the above documents. New terms in American law that adopt the supremacy clause have never been approved by 3/4 majority of the state legislative bodies, as is required to revise the Constitution of the United States. (People call for a new Constitution all the time now, but it was already quietly invalidated by Communitarian supremacy under international agreements over 20 years ago!)

All dissent against the insane expansion of government power over private lives and national economies is funnelled into groups that play a role in the conflict or the pre-prepared solution. I have found more and more people from every side of the political and religious spectrum clamoring for a communitarian solution to the global economic crisis. From the Occupy movement to the Pope, to the leaders of many nations and major NGOs, they all repeat the same three things: Elimination of 1.Degradation of the environment, 2. Poverty, and 3. Social Equity.

Many agreements to reach these goals by specific dates already exist. Agenda 21 and sustainable development are just the tip of the iceberg. Related agreements like The Millennium Goals, and their significance to the radical legal and structural changes now happening to existing national systems, cannot be overemphasized. Remember what Victor said about the Millenium goals in his paper about Communitarian norms? Didn't he say, "In this paper we try to introduce a new evaluation method of the cooperation for development policies and interpretation of the degree of communitarisation of the national policies that will enable us to appreciate the stages that have to be completed by the member countries but also by the EU to realize a completely uniform European assistance strategy and of the activities, so necessary for raising the efficiency of the funds allocated by the EU, but also in the perspective of achieving the Millennium Development Goals"?We're so lucky, because Victor told us the method.He provided the link between sustainable development, human development, and communitarian norms. Notice Victor didn't write a paper about communist or socialist norms that would help in the perspective of acheiving the Millennium Goals.

The emerging supranational system of global governance, or the New World Order (NWO) as many of our esteemed leaders prefer to call it, is based on a philosophy of law called communitarianism. It's basic, most simple concept is explained as the "balance" between too much liberty and too much servitude. It's a balance between unfettered anarcho capitalism with limited government intrusion, and state controlled collectivism with total government intrusion. It's the perfect middle, and it is being presented as the most reasonable compromise between all the forces gathering to fight the dialectical battles in the streets of America.

The global system has already been built that will replace all national governments. In Russia, China, Cuba, Indonesia, Africa, Israel and the EU, the ideology for the new system is well understood by officials. In South America and portions of Africa and the Middle East it's been used to rally the Indigenous people's support for global enforcement of protections of Human Rights and the Environment. Sustainable Development, one of the programs under Communitarianism, has been adopted not only by global to local governments but by most businesses as well.

Bolivia, leading the call for full Human rights for Mother Earth, modified their national constitution to openly embrace a new form of socialism called Communitarianism. The social evolution of humanity as planned is well into the advanced stages.

Many Americans say they are ready to fight, but armed struggle is a two edged sword for Americans. An armed rebellion or conflict within our national boundaries would be disastrous for anyone clinging to any sense of freedom. There are many new law enforcement agencies dedicated to preserving global communitarianism, and not only have our forces become militarized peacekeepers, the datagathering capabilities and interdepartmental sharing between Community Police around the globe continues to grow.

I still say we all need to ask for our COPS' "file."

We, as a nation, remain totally out of the loop when it comes to Communitarian integration of standards and norms, even as our nation adopts the laws that solidify our collective status in the international courts. So, why do so many people steer concerned citizens away from knowing what system the UN will activate after they "save the day?" All evidence suggest the UN expects us to beg for them to help change the world we live in. I didn't think we would. I was wrong.

Twelve years ago when I started my rants against communitarianism, nobody had heard of the term. Today more than some of our people are saying communitarianism is a much better way to live. The "masses" still believe in the dialectical lies, much the same way 20th century Russians and Germans did,. My studies have shown that historically, as well as today, the masses aren't always the 99%, until membership in the ruling party becomes mandatory.

Every former nation in the world has been subdued and forced to committing to the same efforts. The invasion of Afghanistan wasn't just about oil pipelines or poppies, it can't only be that, not when the primary result is their adoption of the global system for a sustainable planet.

21 November 2011 – The General Assembly called today on countries to reiterate and scale up their support for Afghanistan during its transition period, and outlined six major areas the country should focus on to ensure its long-term stability and progress.

The only thing that leads us to finding Communitarian Law is a familiarity with the term communitarianism. There exists no confirmable source for "communist law" or "socialist law" in any of the important global governance documents (although it does exist in some national documents that cede communitarian law is supreme). The name of the law of integration, and of the principles for which it stands, is Communitarian Law, also known as Community Law.

The principles for supremacy are defined as Communitarian. Capitalism, communism, socialism, totalitarianism, libertarianism, anarchism, fascism etc are not nor have they ever been globally supreme. They were all only stages in the dialectic. Much like the movie Alien with Sigorney Weaver, our familiar political and economic systems are all brothers and sisters working to protect and eventually crown their Big Mother Sucker, Communitarianism.

If we can't see the most powerful enemy to ever invade our lands and our homes, how can we possibly come up with ways to kill (or at least table) it? We don't even know what we're up against. It's so confusing, we need lawyers to study the laws from a constitutional perspective. We need local politicans who are aware and on the lookout for the terms inserted into proposed legislation. But the term Community isn't being taught alongside Sustainable Development and Agenda 21 by the leaders of the pro freedom opposition. Locals aren't being taught the one thing that could be the basis for the biggest class action lawsuit in the history of American civil courts.

Many of the communitarians operate in our neighborhoods as both concerned citizens and government paid agents. This is a glitch in the system, according to my unlawyerly observations, and even though we failed miserably in our Dawson lawsuit, I still think it's an avenue worth pursuing if you go after the actual terms inserted in legal documents. I was once told by a Washington State Supreme Court Justice that he could not rule on anything that didn't come before his court. Dawson never made it to the State Appelate Court, it was bumped up to federal because we cited federal statutes, and a Clinton appointee ruled in favor of the federal community police. Maybe if we'd only cite state laws in our filings we could keep the cases at the level where we have the most power to pack the courtrooms with our neighbors and our local media, and in some states, take our cases before justices who are directly elected by us.

Citizens across America have been subjected to communitarian laws, penalized for violating communitarian laws, and lost their property under communitarian takings. The basis for all these new laws that "balance individual rights against the rights of the community," or the collective, the Common Good or Mother Earth, is the Communitarian philosophy of law. And yes, the neo global ideology has a soft side and a more muscular side.

As our most revered Communitarian guru wrote on his blog in on January 08, 2010:

Now: Muscular Communitarianism

The time for muscular communitarianism has come. In his second year, President Obama best reveal that his communitarianism is not powerless, but indeed has muscles of its own, although these have so far been rarely exercised.

The president has gone the extra mile to show that he is willing to talk, consult, and collaborate with allies and foes alike -- foreign and domestic. Nor has this form of kumbaya communitarianism been without results. Russia and China are supporting sanctions against Iran. The fever of anti-Americanism overseas has subsided some.

But, all said and done, Obama's soft communitarianism has yielded relatively little. Iran continues to thumb its nose at his solicitations; the GOP is mocking it; and the business elites are paying out their bonuses using taxpayer dollars, as if Obama never railed against them. Obama can maintain his positive posture, continue to refuse to hector nations whose regimes are different from ours, and even keep extending an olive branch to the business elites. But he would be much more effective if he would show that communities whose norms and leaders are ignored can twist the arms of, even give a kick in the pants to, those who refuse to collaborate. http://blog.amitaietzioni.org/2010/01/now-muscular-communitarianism.html

One more time, because it's well worth repeatng:

.. he [Obama] would be much more effective if he would show that communities whose norms and leaders are ignored can twist the arms of, even give a kick in the pants to, those who refuse to collaborate.

To a communitarian thinker, especially an Israeli commando who fought as a terorist for Israeli independence, nuking Iranian civilians may be little more than a swift kick in the pants. To the rest of the thinking world, it's more like an explosion that blows uncollaborating pants into tiny pieces. Remember, in Orwellian doublespeak, war means peace. And nobody speaks doublespeak better than Amitai Etzioni, the Tree of Knowledge from Zion.

A well known intellectual on social policy who first rose to prominence in the 1970s, Amitai Etzioni is a professor of international relations at George Washington University and founding director of the Institute for Communitarian Studies.[1]

Although best known for his work and theories on sociology and domestic policy, Etzioni has, since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, become an increasingly strident—if often idiosyncratic—proponent of military solutions to U.S. foreign policy problems, in particular those dealing with Israeli security. (For more on Etzioni’s history and ideas, see Marsha B. Cohen, “Muscular Nonrationality: Amitai Etzioni and War with Iran,” Right Web, July 21, 2010.)

An illustrative example of Etzioni’s militarist views is his May 2010 article for the U.S. Army’s Military Review titled “Can a Nuclear-Armed Iran Be Deterred?” In the article, Etzioni claims that once armed with nuclear weapons Iran will be impervious to nuclear deterrence and thus, the United States should bomb the country to derail its nuclear program. He contends that a concerted bombing campaign targeting civilian infrastructure—including “bridges, railroad stations, and other such assets, just the way the U.S. did in Germany and Japan in World War II”—is the only way to dissuade Iran from attempting to develop nuclear weapons.[2]

Because the objective of such attacks on non-nuclear targets would be causing pain to the entire Iranian population, “it matters not if one misses some,” Etzioni said. He even proposes that the strikes be carried out at night, and with “proper warning,” in order to minimize civilian casualties.[3]

Etzioni didn't found the Communist Network. He didn't found the Socialist Network. Etzioni founded the Communitarian Network, an advisory organization that came to the United States to "shore up the moral, social and political environment." Our laws against premeditated murder of civillians is considered an immoral barrier to global communitarian wars. Our laws may be the only thing left on the planet that can stop the final horror in its tracks. We'll never know for sure unless we try. There just have to be other ideas that haven't been thought of yet.

But first we'd have to stop fighting each other and turn our wrath toward our common enemy. We'd have to stop furthering the phony dialectical conflict between rich and poor and not allow ourselves to be swayed anymore into helping to hasten our own defeat. We'd have to put all America first to find a way to come together to ward off the creeping invasion. We'd have to find a way to respect our many differences, because it's that lack of honor among men that's costing us our freedom, our lives and the lives of countless innocents around the globe. The more hate we promote toward our countrymen and other nations and religions, the more we fuel the communitarian bonfire. Our nation is one big spark ready to blow. I'm gonna pray for rain.

Sunday, November 20, 2011

From my friend Jo D, this article provides a lot of research leads that may be worth the time to investigate further. The website this was posted at is owned by a Christian minister whose work has proved invaluable to ACL research. Berit has also republished portions of the Anti Communitarian Manifesto and our communitarian research, with a disclaimer that she cannot endorse all our views. We agree that we don't all need to believe the exact same way. Thanks Jo!

The “occupying” protests here in America have been characterized as spontaneous and leaderless. Protesters, politicians, and the mass media have compared it to the so-called spontaneous uprisings of the Arab Spring. In reality, neither has been spontaneous nor leaderless. The Arab Spring was planned years ago and then executed by the forces of oppression that the people thought they were attempting to overthrow.

In an AFP article last April, Michael Posner, Assistant Secretary of State, admitted that the US trained 5000 activists last February from Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, and Lebanon. The goal was to provide the technology to circumvent government obstruction and help activists create a ripple effect by training their colleagues in the arts of government destabilization. Posner said our Federal government budgeted $50 million to develop new technologies to protect activists from arrest by authoritarian governments.

This assistance did not create the Arab Spring, but it helped perpetuate it. The campaign to destabilize the Middle East began much earlier, as geopolitical analyst Tony Cartalucci has repeatedly demonstrated.

Last May, Cartalucci wrote the article "America’s Arab Deception." He stated,

“The Arab Spring was entirely engineered, prepared for, activists trained, funded, and equipped by the United States, years in advance, based on successes and experience garnered from decades of extraterritorial meddling. In particular, a coalition between the US State Department, NGO’s, corporations, and organizations entirely contrived for the sole purpose of fomenting unrest in foreign nations, began as early as 2008 preparing for what is now unfolding in the Middle East and North Africa.”

Much of this can be collaborated in Ron Nixon’s April 14thNew York Times article, “US Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings.” Nixon spinned past Cartalucci’s logical assessment when he wrote, “No one doubts that the Arab uprisings are home grown, rather than resulting from ‘foreign influence,’ as alleged by some Middle Eastern leaders.”

Good writers always avoid categorical statements, but Nixon’s statement is also illogical. He claimed there were no doubters, which he refuted when he mentioned the allegations of Middle Eastern leaders. And no one doubts the New York Times is intolerant of logic.

To reinforce his position, Nixon quoted Stephen McInerney, executive director of the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED), “We didn’t fund them to start protests, but we did help support their development of skills and networking. That training did play a role in what ultimately happened, but it was their revolution. We didn’t start it.”

On April 15th, Cartalucci wrote in LandDestroyer,

“Also conceding involvement is the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED), chaired by various Council on Foreign Relations and Brookings Institute alumni. POMED claims that they helped protestors develop skills and to network. Such training has taken place annually under Movements.org starting in 2008 where Egypt’s April 6 movement among many others, learned techniques to subvert their government. Movements.org of course is sponsored by a conglomerate of corporations and government agencies including the US State Department, Google, MTV, the Edelman public relations firm, Facebook, CBS News, MSNBC, and others. Despite the claim that such meddling is ‘promoting democracy,’ looking at the sponsors and war mongering interests involved in this operation, it appears to be more about promoting global military and economic hegemony.”

Despite his extreme message, Cartalucci’s analysis is supported by facts.

Big Brother’s Clenched Fist Leads the Clueless

In America, our protests appear leaderless, ill-defined, and uncoordinated. To mask the central planning, the protests began small in a few cities before the national rollout proceeded, a common tactic of most marketing schemes. These protests are not leaderless. And their well-defined agenda can be derived from those manipulating the leaderless mobs behind the scenes.

Last July, Adbusters Media Foundation announced they were organizing a street protest to occupy Wall Street. Founded in 1989 by Kalle Lasn and Bill Schmalz, this Canadian firm describes itself as “a global network of artists, activists, writers, pranksters, students, educators, and entrepreneurs who want to advance the new social activist movement of the information age.” They are anti- Capitalism, anti-consumerism, pro-environment, and pro-violence.

Adbusters is financed through its magazine subscriptions, but it also received grants the last ten years totaling $185,000 from the Tides Foundation, which is partly financed by the mastermind of financial destabilization, George Soros. Soros announced his sympathy for the protestors and has committed his organizational and financial resources.

Soros’ MoveOn.org has organized liberal protest movements in the past and urged its members to join the “occupying” protests. MoveOn.org has also promoted an Internet-based demonstration in conjunction with Rebuild the Dream, another radical group financed by Soros and led by Van Jones. Van Jones was President Obama’s former Green Jobs Czar, who resigned when his past extremism was exposed

In an e-mail to its supporters, MoveOn predicted,

“Together, we’ll add hundreds of thousands of voices of solidarity from the American Dream Movement for the protests across the country and show just how widespread outrage at the Wall Street banks really is.”

Van Jones is a central planner using his front group Rebuild the Dream among others. In a speech to the Soros funded Center for American Progress, he compared our protests to the Arab Spring.

“They had the Arab spring, which was a people-powered, non-violent opportunity to change the conversation in those countries. We should have an American Autumn, people-powered, non-violent.”

David DeGraw of AmpedStatus is another central player who spent the last three years trying to organize protests in America against the international bankers. As his website was attacked and knocked offline, the loosely led hacker group, Anonymous, approached him covertly and helped salvage his work and website. DeGraw organized a protest to begin against Wall Street on Flag Day, June 14th. Anonymous also announced “Operation Empire State Rebellion” to begin June 14th. When that fizzled, DeGraw teamed with Adbusters to coordinate the September attack.

DeGraw has a comprehensive world view. His claim that the global rebellions are decentralized and leaderless is a liberal lie. He expects these revolts to eventually destroy the power of the global elite, but this utopian posture is a common ploy.

In August, Anonymous announced they were joining the September protests. Anonymous destabilizes government agencies, corporations, and affiliated associations by hacking into their computer networks. They revile the central bankers and have demanded Bernanke’s resignation. They’ve also encouraged the Wall Street protesters and declared victory in a video message with a “checkmate.”

Anonymous was also involved in the Arab Spring. During the height of the protests, they waged cyber-attacks on Egyptian government websites. In August, they did the same to Syria’s Ministry of Defense.

Julian Assange of WikiLeaks has been discredited by astute observers as a pawn of the globalists he seemingly exposes. On October 15th, Assange addressed an adoring crowd of protesters in London. As he champions greater transparency through leaked documents, regimes have crumbled. Last May, Amnesty International praised WikiLeaks and the newspapers that published their released confidential files as a catalyst behind the Arab Spring.

Tony Cartalluci has described the central planning of Movements.org behind the Arab Spring. These consultants of revolution have recently developed a series of educational resources for the protesters. On October 7th, Rachel Silver posted on their website, “In response to the widespread protests and demonstrations happening across the USA we’ve compiled a series of guides that will help organizers to sustain their movement nationally and locally and make the most of online and digital tools.” These how-to guides for activists and organizers were allegedly developed “in response” to the protests, not prior, but sometimes the truth is inconvenient.

For years, both ACORN and Service Employees International Union (SEIU) have organized campaigns against Capitalism. On a video last March, Steve Lerner of SEIU spoke of a scheme to destroy the stock market, destabilize our nation, and redistribute its wealth. About the same time, ACORN’s founder Wade Rathke also called for massive “Day of Rage” protests that would target bankers. Both men are allied and close to President Obama.

ACORN filed for bankruptcy after it was exposed for a variety of criminal activities, but over the years, it has spawned front groups across our nation, most notably the Working Families Party, which helped organize “Occupy Wall Street.” WFP’s Nelini Stamp has been a regular at the site since day one.

Anthropologist David Graeber leads the global justice movement and promotes direct democracy to replace representative democracy. He’s provided the intellectual groundwork that justifies these protests, their embrace of direct democracy, and consensus building through group manipulation.

Garret LoPorto adds a valuable skill to the central planning. LoPorto learned his craft as a media consultant for Skull and Bones member, John Kerry, when Kerry ran for President. He helped organize “Occupy Boston.”

The radical street organizer Lisa Fithian has been involved since the beginning of the protests. For decades she has fought alongside anti-war advocates, anti-globalists, labor unions, and anarchists. She’s been a regular at “Occupy Chicago.” Her specialty is the creation of a crisis, because as she explained, “Crisis is that edge where change is possible.”

Legendary Socialist professor, Frances Fox Piven, is another central planner who has fought Capitalism all her life. Last January in an interview with Amy Goodman, she said, “I think it’s also crazy to call me a commie, a socialist, a revolutionary or whatever.” As an academic, she’s been taught that the truth is relative. In 2003, Piven was elected Honorary Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Countless labor unions and leftwing community groups have swelled the ranks. Other leftwing organizations supporting the protests include the Socialist Party USA, Planned Parenthood, Democracy For America, Campaign for America’s Future, People for the American Way, Public Campaign, Code Pink, Common Cause, Action United, Organize Now, and on and on.

In a development similar to the 1950’s, when Congressional investigations exposed the interlocking network of hundreds of Communist front groups with the nonprofit foundations, which was quickly covered up, many of these organizations are interlocked, working together, and financed by the powerful nonprofit foundations.

The protests appear to be the culmination of much prior work nationally and globally, perhaps decades of work. The leaders comprise a Who’s Who of anti-American radicals. There is nothing spontaneous or leaderless about these protests.

Days of Rage

The protests are parroted as nonviolent, but every now and then, undercurrents arise that gush with revolution and its necessary violence. This is more consistent with its initial theme as “Days of Rage,” which is reminiscent of the violent Days of Rage riots orchestrated by the Weather Underground in Chicago in 1969.

Frances Fox Piven doesn’t seem averse to the rhetoric of nonviolence, because she sees its true intent, as a marketing ploy. In a recent speech at Messiah College, she indicated her only problem with violence is the negative publicity that would result. She also said, “Riots are what poor people do when they get together.”

In a January article in The Nation, Mobilizing the Jobless, Piven wrote

“Local protests have to accumulate and spread — and become more disruptive — to create serious pressures on national politicians. An effective movement of the unemployed will have to look something like the strikes and riots that have spread across Greece in response to the austerity measures forced on the Greek government by the European Union, or like the student protests that recently spread with lightning speed across England in response to the prospect of greatly increased school fees.”

Due to public outrage at her position, The Nation defended her in a February editorial. They also added, “Recognizing the leverage that oppressed groups have – and working with them to use it – is her special genius.” This special genius is the hallmark of all good revolutionaries, who then exploit the powerless for their own aims.

On October 2nd after Piven addressed the OWS crowd, she concluded, “This is going to be the fight of our lives.”

In his book Culture Jam, Kalle Lasn predicted, “We will wreck this world.” He’s also said, “Rage drives revolutions.”

Van Jones no longer wants reforms or incremental changes. “We’re not going to put a new battery in a broken system. We want a new system.”

In interviews, Lisa Fithian promotes peaceful protests, but she’s also stated, “I have no issue with property destruction.” She helped instigate the violent Seattle riots in 1999 when the WTO was in town.

For years, these anti-American activists have sown seeds among our youth awaiting the harvest. They are the catalysts, and they expect an inferno.

Manipulating the Masses

By design, the protesters have been unclear about their central demands and agenda. On Oct 5th, Garret LoPorto was interviewed by radio host Michael Graham. He said, “It’s a process of reclaiming democracy. We all know there’s something wrong with the system. How are we going to fix it? How can we make it better?” He offered no solutions – specific goals will come later.

On Aug 12th, Adbusters posted an update prior to the protests that explains their approach. “Strategically speaking, there is a very real danger that if we naively put our cards on the table and rally around the ‘overthrow of capitalism’ or some equally outworn utopian slogan, then our Tahrir moment will quickly fizzle into another inconsequential ultra-lefty spectacle soon forgotten.”

Adbusters prefers stealth at the beginning. A consensus can be engineered at any time using the Delphi technique, which relies on mass psychology to manipulate the group toward a predetermined consensus. It uses Hegel’s dialectic to reconcile opposing forces and create a new synthesis. The successful “change agent” or facilitator must be an astute observer of human behavior and trained in psychology. This process has been mastered by the Progressives, who used it across our nation to transform our schools into rubbish.

The Delphi technique is a sophisticated process, but on its simplest level, the facilitator uses peer pressure and other group dynamics to isolate or marginalize dissenting voices, while rallying those sympathetic to the “correct” position. The group is not only led to the preconceived consensus, but they are also led to believe they arrived at it independently. This process has been fine-tuned over the decades “awaiting the time when it would be implemented extensively in the interests of transforming America.” (This quote was posted anonymously last July.)

To prevent any political or moneyed interest from hijacking the movement, the protesters convene a General Assembly every day in every city, so that everyone has a voice – although, not everyone is granted that right as Congressman John Lewis found out. The group engages in direct democracy which leads to a consensus on a variety of topics from when and where to march to trash pick-up. Hand signals either arouse the group’s favor or incite disapproval. Consensus is engineered daily, while the crowd is indoctrinated in direct democracy.

Perhaps more sinister, as Dr. Webster Tarpley reported weeks ago, the general assembly may be a simple diversion. Tarpley said eyewitnesses have identified about twenty mysterious individuals who seem to comprise a secret steering committee that supersedes the General Assembly. They’re much older than the average protester and appear to have a military orientation. Recently, thousands of leaked e-mails have confirmed the existence of two secret committees, a Demands Committee and a Constitution Committee. These leaders prefer to remain behind the scenes. When their work is done, they will present it to the General Assembly for approval.

For decades, psychology has been mined for better methods to manipulate the masses. Today, the methods are more sophisticated, more brazen, and more effective. The protest organizers are manufacturing dissent within society, while creating consensus within the movement.

Garret LoPorto is a depth psychologist who understands how to manipulate unconscious urges. To promote his marketing firm TotalConvert, LoPorto wrote, “If you want people to believe in your brand, (and share that belief with others), your brand must be evolved into a cult brand. If you want buzz; if you want viral marketing; if you want sky-high conversion rates and you want customers to not just be customers, but total converts, then you’ve come to the right consulting firm.”

Creating a cult brand is his specialty. To accomplish this, he uses psychographics marketing, which divides people into groups based on their psychological profile. Psychographics relies on surveys, interviews, and focus groups, but now marketers also mine the social networks for psychological data. Using the Internet and its social networks, psychographics enables viral marketing.

LoPorto is a rarity. He’s also creating a cult following called the Wayseers. The Wayseers Manifesto is a slick video production that reveals LoPorto’s understanding of human behavior. Many viewers were reduced to tears, as if their eyes were suddenly opened and they found their long lost home. It is powerful propaganda that uses trance music, which shifts consciousness from a beta state to an alpha state. This renders the viewer more susceptible to its message. It begins:

“Attention: All you rule-breakers, you misfits and troublemakers – all you free spirits and pioneers – all you visionaries and non-conformists … Everything that the establishment has told you is wrong with you – is actually what’s right with you. You see things others don’t. You are hardwired to change the world. Unlike nine out of ten people – your mind is irrepressible – and this threatens authority. You were born to be a revolutionary. You can’t stand rules because in your heart you know there’s a better way. You have strengths dangerous to the establishment – and it wants them eliminated, So your whole life you’ve been told your strengths were weaknesses – Now I’m telling you otherwise.”

The video is ten minutes of New Age mystical Gnosticism that promotes revolutionary thinking and action. It ends:

LoPorto reassures the disenfranchised viewer that they are special, needed, and welcome. They don’t need to follow rules that have been rigged against them. They must destroy the rule-makers and revolt against the established order. The video is a recruiting device to build a network of mindless revolutionaries who will blindly follow their self-proclaimed enlightened leader.

Soros is the most dangerous of the central planners because of his wealth, organizational skills, and diabolical ambition, but LoPorto is dangerous because of his creative genius.

New Agers Have the Answers

Pure Energy Systems News announced a new documentary that will be released on 11/11/11: “An upcoming documentary named, ‘Thrive – What on Earth will it take?’ will seek to explain the sources of human suffering, expose the elite power structures (such as big oil) that have contributed to it, and provide an answer including free energy, explaining what it will take to improve the human condition on this planet.”

Supposedly, an ancient code embedded by extraterrestrials in ancient ruins, crop circles, and art has been suppressed by the global elite. Unlocking its secret is the key to free energy which will save our distressed planet from imminent destruction. The documentary has been plugged by prominent New Agers who hope the Thrive Movement goes viral.

The PESN article also posed an ominous question: “Could this documentary be a trigger that sparks a revolution?”

Triggers

There are many triggers that might spark the fuse. A manufactured crisis is the standard approach. An epic economic meltdown cannot be avoided for long and would trigger widescale rioting.

Another trigger is foreshadowed by an Anonymous slogan. They issued a conditional demand that was featured in LoPorto’s Manifesto, has its own facebook page, and was displayed on posters during the Arab Spring. “If your government shuts down the Internet, shut down your government.” This crisis also seems inevitable.

The clamor for a Constitutional Convention is growing which could also cause chaos because it would certainly be co-opted by a predetermined consensus that would overthrow our Constitutional liberties. This crisis must be avoided.

Villains

The protesters are supplied with enough villains to keep the blame game running like an endless marathon: greedy bankers, crony capitalists, corrupt politicians, and selfish rich people.

President Obama is sympathetic. He cannot run for re-election on his record, so he’s been blaming everyone and everything else from the prior administration to his opponents, natural disasters, the Arab Spring, etc. But he’s recently focused on a common villain that the protesters revile – the bankers and other rich people, especially those of the Wall Street variety. His slogan “the rich must pay their fair share” gets shriller as he stokes class warfare.

Our President’s sympathy for the Wall Street protesters is disingenuous but consistent with his administration’s widespread deception and complicit lack of transparency. Wall Street enriched Obama’s 2008 Presidential campaign and helped him get elected. Objective observers include mainstream journalists on the list of villains because only the alternative media mentions this.

This was illustrated a few weeks ago as Van Jones mixed with the Wall Street protesters. Luke Rudowski of We Are Change questioned him on camera about Wall Street’s generosity during Obama’s 2008 campaign. Van Jones promptly fled the area.

If Mitt Romney wins the Republican nomination, the villains of Wall Street could derail his Presidential bid. Wall Street has reversed its support of Democratic candidates and is backing Romney with a steady flow of campaign dollars. More likely, this is another phony opposition campaign to taint his campaign. The globalists who own Wall Street would love to see President Obama re-elected.

The International Agenda

On October 15th, the protest movement held events in over 900 cities in 82 countries. In America, hundreds of organizations are engaged in the destruction of old fashioned American liberty based on our Constitution. Across the globe, there are thousands of groups rallying for regime changes in the form of democratic socialism.

Common themes include a false spontaneity in the face of manufactured dissent. The clenched fist is the universal symbol, a staple of socialist and communist groups worldwide. The protests are youth-led, who bring high energy, have no negative political baggage, and are more pliable than their elders. They are also more indoctrinated, as the techniques of propaganda have evolved in step with technology. Their primary needs are organizational skills, positive media exposure, and money, needs easily exploited.

The US State Department and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) both have mandates to promote democracy internationally. Direct involvement in the internal affairs of other countries can compromise their support, so they contract with non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), International Republican Institute, National Democractic Institute, Asia Foundation, Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy, Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI), the Democracy Council, and previously mentioned POMED, among many others.

Sometimes financing is misdirected through front groups. WikiLeaks released diplomatic cables from Damascus that showed one channel to finance Syrian opposition groups. Our State Department granted $6.3 million to the Democracy Council who then financed MEPI who financed Syrian exiles.

In Egypt and Tunisia, as the US government publicly supported the puppet regime, it also privately financed the opposition. Dictators can become inconvenient for a variety of reasons including massive public unrest, which sometimes is manufactured for other reasons. To control the outcome, the US must co-opt the dissent. This explains our President’s behavior during the Egyptian revolt. Initially, out of instinct, he supported our old ally Mubarak, but he finally caught on.

The Egyptian uprising provides a case study of how revolutions are US-engineered. The conventional mainstream media myth portrayed the revolutionaries as spontaneous freedom fighters. To retain their prestige, mainstream journalists do not investigate or expose the lies in the State Department handouts they parrot, but the alternative media does. Tony Cartalucci exposed the myriad groups that were involved long before the moment became ripe.

Cartalucci also showed how Movements.org, a subsidiary of the Alliance for Youth Movements, sponsored by Google and staffed by former executives, helped the young Egyptians develop the technological skills for communication and social networking. But the real revolution required bodies in the streets not digitalized avatars or Facebook friends. In 2009, Egyptian activist Mohamed Adel went to Belgrade, Serbia for guidance, home of the Center for Applied NonViolent Action and Strategies (CANVAS), which was spawned by OPTOR, the resistance group that ousted Slobodan Milosevic.

CANVAS provided the necessary training. According to Tina Rosenberg’s February article in Foreign Policy Revolution U,

“They have worked with democracy advocates from more than 50 countries. They have advised groups of young people on how to take on some of the worst governments in the world – and in Georgia, Ukraine, Syria-occupied Lebanon, the Maldives, and now Egypt, those young people won.”

Perhaps winning is a relative term like the truth. Eight months after her article appeared, it doesn’t look like the Egyptian people have won anything except a sorry economy.

Another media myth has portrayed young Serbian Ivan Marovic as the heroic visionary who helped topple Milosevic using a brilliant grass roots strategy. He was instrumental, but NATO bombs also helped. Not reported was that Marovic’s vision and strategy came from an American, Harvard professor Gene Sharp. Hundreds of copies of his handbook From Dictatorship to Democracy were translated into the Serbian language and distributed by the Albert Einstein Institute, which specializes in methods of non-violent resistance.

An award winning documentary, How to start a Revolution, was recently released last month and reveals Sharp’s global influence.

In addition to Sharp’s assistance, the OPTOR revolutionaries also received CIA training and were partly financed by the US government through Freedom House and NED. Despite OPTOR’s lies to the contrary, this financing was confirmed after the Serbian coup, and many members quit.

On September 22nd, Marovic addressed the sympathetic OWS crowd in New York.

OPTOR and CANVAS adopted the clenched fist symbol over a decade ago, so it was not surprising to see it prominently displayed in the streets of Cairo during their uprising. It’s become the official logo of OWS and all the global protests and revolutions. Perhaps this universal symbol will unite us all in one-world government after the destabilization campaigns accomplish their global destruction through economic ruin and the resulting riots.

A Populist Revolution

The protests are portrayed as a populist movement by the 99% have-nots against the elite. In an Oct 7th article, the Activist Post wrote, “The elite are specialists at divide-and-conquer techniques, but that becomes exceedingly difficult when the melting pot of America truly spills over.”

The elite are also experts at false-flag operations and phony opposition campaigns that appear to undermine their interests, while it consolidates their power. History illustrates the success of this tactic. In 1913, a phony opposition campaign enabled the approval of the Federal Reserve Act.

The Activist Post called for its readers to “participate in what looks like the genuine start of the Second American Revolution.” A revolution against the controlling elite that thrusts off the tyranny of their central banking, the indoctrination in their schools, the lies of their media, and the brainwashing of their entertainment, would be a welcome development. But a revolution that appears to free the oppressed masses from the ultra-rich, while it is manipulated behind the scenes by the globalist elite will only lead to more enslavement.

The Doom of Liberty

Kalle Lasn of Adbusters is correct when he says that mega-corporations promote mass-consumerism through the brainwashing of television commercials. He was correct when he called television viewing “a major mental health problem.” Public opinion is now mass manufactured, and behaviors are created to keep the public distracted from the real issues in life. Television, movies, and computer games are not only addictive forms of vicarious living, rather than real living, but the audio-visual images are also powerful propaganda.

The protesters are correct when they condemn our mega-corporations, because they practice a crony Capitalism that inhibits free enterprise through government regulations, lobbyists who rig the rules, trade associations, campaign donations, and the swinging door between business and government. Crony Capitalism must be abolished.

The protestors are correct about the ills of Wall Street. Wall Street enriches itself, but only as a facilitator for big business and the Federal Reserve, which are the real culprits behind our economic woes and injustices.

Our young college graduates are justifiably angry when they can’t find a job or are forced to take a low paying job that will not pay down the enormous debt they incurred to get a worthless degree. But their anger is misdirected at the corporations that don’t want or need them. They should blame the real villains – the universities who swindled them with outrageous tuitions that had to be borrowed. In the past thirty years, college tuition has risen over 400%, while the quality of education has declined inversely.

Anger is becoming epidemic, but we will see the relationship between the protesters and our President get cozier. We will see demands clarified and leaders emboldened. We will probably see the harsh winter disperse the crowds to warmer climes. But networks are being established, and protesters are being indoctrinated.

The socialist cancer has invaded our vital organs: our government, our public and higher education, our mass media, our arts and sciences. Our language has changed, and our dialogue has been misdirected. The cancer might go away for a moment, but it will return more virulent, and it will eventually get violent.

As a nation, we waste our leisure time in pursuits of excitement, idleness, or pleasure. In the old days, leisure time was a valuable gift. Leisure and liberty were both hard earned by our great forebears, which many have taken for granted. We are living on borrowed time, a debt that must be repaid.

A time of reckoning is now upon us. It is time to turn off the insidious TV, the dehumanizing music, a time to tune out the deceptive media. It is time to replace our trivial pursuits with fasting, fervent prayer, and the study of the Scriptures. It is time to turn to our Lord with full purpose of heart. If we follow His lead, our concerns will be eased, our burdens will be lighter, and our faith will be strengthened.

Saturday, November 19, 2011

UN Agenda 21 is finally making national news in the USA. After nearly 20 years in the making, the American people are being told it exists. But the way they are learning about it is a shame. National "exposure" is primarily coming from conservatives like Beck and Newt, who're telling their listeners it's a socialist plot to take away American's private property rights.

By not telling us Agenda 21 is only one of hundreds of communitarian programs and initiatives underway in the United States, the phony right can easily control and limit the debates to just a couple issues. This ensures the much bigger communitarian plan associated with Agenda 21 remains as obscure as Agenda 21 was for almost two decades.

The "leaders" in the fight against global communitarian plans decided years ago to not use the correct terminology in their teachings. More than one told me to stop using the word altogther if I wanted their endorsements or support. This is why the ACL has remained a lone endeavor. Our ACL research about the communitarian philosophy driving the plan was not ever supposed to be part of the discussions. Then there was a glitch in the plan... and it came in the shape of a dynamic professional whose contribution to the awareness of Americans is truely American.

Why did Rosa talk so openly about communitarianism and put it on her website? Because a nice man named Kevin Eggers lent her his copies of our books, The Anti Communitarian Manifesto and 2020: Our Common Destiny. After she read them, Rosa contacted me and said our ACL work put everything she had learned about sustainable development into perspective. She told me that she really appreciated our communitarian legal research and verifiable sources. Armed with the knowledge we provided, and her own professional background in high end real estate assessments, she put aside all party politics and became willing to reach out to the only groups that were interested in any of this, predominantly Christian conservatives.

Americans conservative groups didn't know anything about Agenda 21. Starving for some solid information about the transformation of the entire American system, Rosa quickly became a highly sought after speaker. And true to her nature, she's also begun reaching out to the Occupy movement because she understands that ultimately we all share the same concerns about the future and the way things have gone down the tubes in this country.

I was given my first opportunity to talk about communitarianism only because Rosa made it an integral part of her website and Behind the Green Mask conference. I wanted more than anything to go to her conference, but I'm still living on barely nothing, and I certainly didn't have enough money to travel outside. Plus, after years of harsh winter camping and near starvation due to my non stop research and writing for the ACL, I've got some serious health challenges. This past summer I was bedridden three separate times and if I don't see a dentist soon, I'm not going to get any better. I made the free choice in 1999 to give up my life to do this work if I had to, but I never really expected I'd die from it.. heh. Were I to stumble upon the plan today I don't think I'd do things quite the same way, nor with the same fervor or dedication.

Agenda 21 was ten years old by the time I found out about it. Back then, all the officials in Seattle denied any association with the programme for international development. Now they don't hide it, they just gloss over any cumbersome details and insist the plan is benign. If it were truely benign, why would officials have gone to such trouble to hide its very existence?

Between June 1993 and June 1999, the PCSD has advised President Clinton on sustainable development and develops bold, new approaches to achieve economic, environmental, and equity goals. We are commited to the achievement of a dignified, peaceful, and equitable existence.

(According to the above website, Seattle was one of three cities used in a pilot test called "Hassle Free Cities". I didn't know that, my research only identified 5 pilot tests I was used in, and that wasn't one of them. It's somewhat ironic; the reason I learned about communitarian plans in 1999 was becausethe City of Seattle began hassling all the poor tenants in my neighborhood!)

The NPRG mentions nothing about Agenda 21 or sustainable development. Other than calling citizens "customers" it looks, on the surface, like it was a sincere attempt to reduce government spending and waste. But what it did was create a whole new set of standards and laws that most Americans will never have the time or the inclination to read. It also mentions nothing about the Building Livable Communities Initiative or its sub-program, the Creating Safe Streets Initiative, which included the community policing/datagathering pilot test my neighborhood was part of.

The Clinton-Gore Livability Initiative, "Building Livable Communities for the 21st Century," helps communities across America grow in ways that ensure a better quality of life and strong, sustainable economic growth. This initiative, launched a year ago, is strengthening the federal government's role as a partner with the growing number of state and local efforts to build "livable communities" by encouraging coordination on new initiatives, improving coordination of existing programs, and conducting appropriate outreach to key constituent groups. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publicroads/00mayjun/liability.cfm

A google search for the "Creating Safe Streets Initiative" gives only 2 returns, and both of them are to me. One is to an article I wrote from July 2000. I didn't have any websites back then, it was republished by an indy media site: http://www.phillyimc.org/en/node/33597. Why was the official information about it pulled off the internet? I recall it being a very long initiative with a lot of different policing programs included in it. The federal program isn't on the web anymore, but the exact same phrase, Creating Safe Streets, is used in cities across the country.

The livable community concept is based on the principles of sustainable development that focus on patterns of economic activity that produce environmental quality, economic prosperity, and social equity. The Livability Initiative goes further by providing tools and resources to encourage communities to collaborate to find new ways to manage land use, transportation, and other resources to ensure a high quality of life and strong, sustainable economic growth. Because communities know what is best for themselves, the community's perspectives are emphasized in all decision-making processes.

What our research proves is that "community" members who have a different perspective from the community planners are denied input into the community planning meetings, if they are lucky enough to even know there's meetings happening in the community. I attended a lot more than meetings faciliatated to write our neighborhood's Local Agenda 21 plan. I went to the police station for their COPS meetings, to the COMPASS Privacy Council meetings, and Town Hall noise revision meetings. I went to one meeting where Jody Kretzman was doing his dog and pony show for Asset Based Community Development (ABCD), a VERY IMPORTANT PIECE, and Local Agenda 21 is never associated with ABCD. I wasn't focused on just the comprehensive planning, and if I was led to be only interested in Agenda 21, I would have missed all the other things that were going on in my "community."

The one word many Agenda 21 "experts" never emphasize as important is the new use of the term community. The key to understanding Agenda 21 and sustainable development is the word community, because that leads us directly to the guru of rebuilding livable communities, Dr. Amitai Etzioni, and all the community oriented programs, agencies and laws.

There are hundreds of programs that introduced communitarianism into the US (and around the world), which is why the ACL website grew to be so huge and unmanageable. Now that it's gone, (we took it all down and planned to reorganize it before we went under) it makes me just sick that after ten years of writing about it, Agenda 21 is finally being mentioned by a national politician, which means it's also being discussed by Americans. Of course what's being said is enough to make me cringe in embarassment for the people who have never heard of it but who insist they know what it is. I know I've said things that made me look like a fool, we all do at some point in our lives, but I hope I'm not around when they realize just how wrong they are.

If we don't learn enough about the way the new system uses the term "community" Newt Gingrich's comments about UN Local Agenda 21 on CNN sets the stage for another phony dialectical ruse and takes everyone back to the climate change argument. As Mary Oden wrote, in her editorial in the Copper River Record about what a selfish horrible person I am, because I oppose fake rebuilt communities... "community, community, community." This is their mantra, their chant... and they've set themselves up as the only people who "care" about community. The truth is, they're a small group of elitists who believe they control our communities, and if Americans don't start taking their communities back from these usurpers, they will.

Friday, November 18, 2011

I'm working on the final updates to the Agenda 21 chapter of 2020. Here's one of the things that struck me as important enough to add. Konrad Otto-Zimmermann, Secretary General of ICLEI — Local Governance for Sustainability based in Bonn, advised future attendees that the focus of Rio has to be to find new ways to tie local governments to the process. He wrote, in 2011:

"Let’s tie local governments, subnational governments and business into a global framework of policy setting, implementation and accountability, and link this to the multilateral structure national governments are part of."

In his opinion, Otto-Zimmermann sees difficulties in achieving the goals of global environmental governance, and in a section titled Governance Upgrade through Responsive Evolutionhe explains how he would revise the UN Charter:

So let’s look at international climate governance involving national governments, subnational and local governments, business and civil society stakeholders. Again I will focus on cities and local governments as it is my specialty. Would we start by revising the UN Charter, adding a Local Government Chamber to the UN General Assembly, and adding a new constituency to the UN? There are already models for this. One example is the Council of Europe, an inter-governmental body that maintains the Congress of European Municipalities and Regions as a chamber. The European Union maintains a Committee of the Regions as a standing reference body. Could this regional European approach be scaled up to the global level? As one can easily appreciate this might be the preferred approach for experts in international law and the law-makers guild.

According to Otto-Zimmermann, he's been talking to many key players, and there is

... talk about merging functions of International Environmental Governance into one single World Environment Organization modeled on the World Trade Organization.

The WTO began expanding its role in global governance, climate change and social justice legislation during the Doha Round:

In the Doha Round, countries decided to combine the positive role that opening up trade plays in efficiently allocating resources, with a set of negotiations specifically targeted at the environment — the first time environmental issues have ever featured in the context of a multilateral trade round. The negotiations include the relationship between WTO rules and multilateral environmental agreements. While there is no conflict between trade and environmental regimes — and the Appellate Body has repeatedly confirmed that the WTO can take other bodies of international law into account when interpreting its own rules — they nevertheless seek to ensure that these legal regimes operate harmoniously. They also encompass the issue of accelerating the opening of trade in goods and services that can help protect the environment or conserve natural resources – such as air filters, catalytic converters, windmills," OUR PLANET MAGAZINE GLOBALIZATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT, http://www.unep.org/pdf/OurPlanet/OP_Feb07_GC24_en.pdf

Numerous high level calls for a WEO make it seem likely the Rio+20 Earth Summit will include this "idea" on some level, either up front on the public agenda or in private meetings.

The globalization of environmental problems means that environmentalists -- and economists, labor leaders, and other citizens -- need to embrace a concept increasingly being touted, albeit in rarefied policy circles: a single global group with real power, a World Environment Organization.

Global problems require international strategies and coordination, particularly for such goals as maintaining biodiversity, keeping the oceans clean, and lowering carbon emissions. But all too often, national sovereignty divides the world into untenable slices. The European Union, for instance, has developed a coordinated approach to tackling greenhouse gases through conservation measures and technological development. Yet, absent cooperation from the United States, China, and other major powers, such a task might come to seem quixotic. The formation of a World Environment Organization would provide global environmental standards with real teeth. It would also provide an umbrella for environmental organizations, and counteract the problem of single-issue solutions for linked problems.

… Internationalizing knowledge is the easy part. Granting a WEO real authority to enforce best practices, and to punish those who most harm the environment, is the hard part. Following what the WTO says rather than what it does, a WEO must be intensely democratic, transparent, and take into consideration the needs of developing countries. It must provide for an inclusive spectrum of voices and look beyond short-term business interests. It must be run by leading environmental thinkers who occupy a place of real power. And it must have a guaranteed source of substantial funding, perhaps partly via an international tax on polluters." Are WEO There Yet? Why we need a World Environment Organization, by Ethan Goffman, http://www.grist.org/article/goffman

While the UNEP and other United Nations organizations push the agenda from the top down, there are just as many organizations pushing the agenda from the streets. These are the kinds of "locals" who will have a seat at the UN's new enforcement agency:

It goes without saying that politics is a dirty system. It's so dirty that I believe there are only three reasonable approaches to politics: apathy/despair, overthrowing the system, or playing dirty to win. I'll assume that the apathetics either aren't reading this or will soon stop reading to go watch cat videos on YouTube. The second option, revolution, is growing more plausible, and the climate movement should fully support those efforts. The occupations of Wall Street and D.C. have found a weak spot in the wall of corporate power that keeps people out of the halls of influence. Everyone needs to push that spot until we break through the wall and have a new constitutional convention to establish a democracy in this country. 11/14/11

Tim DeChristopher is a climate activist and cofounder of Peaceful Uprising. He has been beatified as a saint in the Church of Earthalujah by the Reverend Billy and convicted as a felon by the United States Government. http://www.grist.org/politics/2011-11-14-letter-from-a-climate-activist-in-prison-tim-dechristopher

So who trains Americans like Tim DeChristopher to become criminal activists calling for a new "democracy" in the United States? Academics like James Gustave Speth, Dean of Forestry and Environmental Studies at Yale University...who wrote in UNEP Magazine Our Planet, Connected Dreams, February 2011:

Individuals and communities can also exert influence as voters and citizens, as investors, as consumers, as association members, as workers, as activists, and as educators. This is already beginning to happen in the United States, where citizen initiatives and local action are beginning to address the global problems of energy and climate change. Meanwhile, Washington itself does little.

Before the big Rio+20 conference, there is a preparation for the Rio+20 conference:

Donate Here!

About Me

2020 / TACM

Available NOW in PDF eBook

Translate

Search This Blog

I'm Niki Raapana, an independent researcher, co-founder of the Anti Communitarian League (ACL) with Nordica Friedrich, co- author of 2020: Our Common Destiny and co-author of the Anti Communitarian Manifesto.